Chappell's point was that the changes to the Mankad rule meant the non-striker can leave earlier than before and back up further, and thus is more likely to be caught short and unable to get back if the ball is driven straight and deflected onto the stumps. I didn't think he was mixed up at all.
Yes in that case chappel is right, but its still the decision of the non striker, he can remain in his crease so warner is at fault for backing up too far , not the changing of the law
The law doesnt say the non striker must run out of thier crease before the ball is bowled
Last edited: